In practice the Spanish and Portugeuse are the only nationalities which traveled to the New World with charters to steal.

The other side of the coin is the US did not openly call for stealing. It is rather an immensely complicated series of single issues against dozens of different tribes. Now that would be an overall condemnation were it not for the fact that in every one of those wars the US had the active support of other tribes in the wars.

The tribes which were reasonably civilized back then are still around today particularly in the northeast where the Iriquois territories cross the border with Canada and the tribes are responsible to neither government.

The point of bringing up the Iriquois is that they survived quite well. Thus there was a clear component of level of civilization involved. Civilized against tribal lost. Civilized against civlized did not lose.

I am not going to give a blanket defense of US expansion as that is not possible. But primitives who considered land itself sacred were not going to be taken seriously by civilized people just as we do not take seriously clowns who claim the land of Palestine is sacred.

This still differs from the Palestinian issue in that both Canada and the US have treaties with the Indian tribes and when those tribes go to court it is for enforcement of the treaties not for their nullification. The Israelis have no treaties with the Palestinians.

I was merely pointing out they left voluntarily. Voluntary leaving cannot be described as "lost."

MAD kept the peace. If the Vietnams had had nukes that 20 year war might not have happened. Proliferation might be a good idea. Unfortunately experimentation is a one way street.

I couldn't say one way or the other, and it's besides the point. 

Didn't say that it did, merely suggested that it was the only nation I'd mentioned that could have been considered a thief. To my knowledge, it is.

I was not referring to "natives" when I called the US a potential thief of land/resources, but Cuba and other foreign nations. As far as "natives" go, that's all the doing of Britain and France and others. The US fought with/against them for independance, not "natives".

Besides, the Iroquois and other tribes still suffered horribly, despite being on "the right side". They still suffer today. Nothing you've said has invalidated anything I've said. I'm starting to wonder where you're trying to go here.

Being taken seriously is not a prerequisite to life and liberty. You go ahead and tell people that their land was stolen because they were buffoons. See if that makes the slightest difference when they execute you.

Actually, they do. They tend to be short lived, but they exist. The only real difference between the scenario I brought in and the one you use is that Canada and the US live in relative peace with the peoples they conquered. Israel does not.

Yes, it can.

Define Lost:

no longer in your possession or control; unable to be found or recovered; "a lost child"; "lost friends"; "his lost book"; "lost opportunities"

Subject closed.

There is no credible argument for escalation providing security. Escalation begets escalation. Violence begets violence.

You might still find it necessary to respond to his rubbish without talking to him. At least I do when confronted with his anti-Semitic delusions.

spin

Ok, here's a response.

You mention Greece and Rome. I take the liberty of asserting you mean Ancient Greece and the Roman empire. A hero of Greek and Roman mythology was Odysseus or Ulysses, depending on the culture. His exploits are available for your reading in both Iliad and Odyssey, works of Homer. I recommend them highly.

Odysseus was a good fighter, archer and a great sailor, but what he was most known for was his intelligence and cunning. Most of his heroic deeds are performed through trickery, con-artistry and rhetoric. Not even looking at the great volume of Greek and Roman philosophy, sophistry and statesmanship, Odysseus alone is enough to assure me that both Greeks and Romans valued these abilities highly - and with good reason.

How can a man know he is being mislead, if he can't read the tell-tale signs? How can a man read the signs, if he can't link them to himself? A man cannot know and represent others or himself against liars, nor can a man choose to be truly honest, if he doesn't know how to lie and lie well.

Today, not only have rhetorics gotten a bad name and been ousted from our culture to the point where we have no tools for analyzing what we are being taught and told, but the whole system of justice has moved completely out of reach of a common man. Even the skills of a lawyer leave you exposed in any other forum than that of the court, since all the different forums have been split and made proprietary to a certain profession and/or set of concepts. Everyone should understand and minimize this fragmentation of forums in his own mind, just to be able to be responsible for his own and the well-being of others. I remember what a very experienced and respected businessman told me, when I asked him why he resigned his position as a board member of a very profitable company: Without insight and influence, responsibility is idiocy.

Practice the art of rhetorics - it is not a bad word. Practice argumentation - know how to structure an argument and know how to analyze it. Know what it means to be lied to, so that you can discern whether the lie was an insult, a simple attempt at deception, a diversion, or something entirely different and learn fine points like these by heart. Always consider your audience. Do not take offense, unless your audience is appropriate. Know the rules and the spirit of the forum.

Just for the technical guide, I personally liked The Study of Effective Reasoning by David Zarefsky, a series of lectures available at the teaching company or any half-good torrent site. I am not endorsing the teaching company, by the way - at least none of their historical and social studies that gets anywhere near our age.

Yes but ... I try to answer without an interminable back and forth quoting that in what I have seen loses the point of the exchange in the details. Let me try to respond where it matters.

As an Americna my ancestors LOST Europe by that definition. I do not present any claim upon the land of Europe because they left rather than were expelled. Palestinians present a claim upon lands in Israel because they were expelled.

There has never been any treaty between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Treaty has a meaning. Never has one been signed between them. If you think there has been, please name them.

No one has ever represented the Palestinians and no one does now. The only lawful representative of a people is that which is elected by the people. Over 2/3rds of Palestinians were not in the electorate for the Palestinian Authority. The PA is not recognized as a government by any country except maybe Palau Palau. There is not now nor has there ever been anyone who could sign a treaty with Israel.

Please feel free to identify what you think are treaties between Israel and the Palestinians. I would like to get to the bottom of where this rumor started.

But again, name them.

Support is not representation. Hamas as the winner of the last election does represent the Palestinians who were included in the electorate. However one can say the leader of the coup against them in theory represents the voters. Which brings us to the question of voters.

Only those in the West Bank and Gaza were able to freely vote in that election and those in occupied Jerusalem only did so at risk of not permitted to return home. Israel continues to try cement its annexation war crime. The total was about 3.75million Palestinians of all ages with probably 1million potential voters. There are some 7million Palestinians who could not vote in that election and are not represented by Hamas in particular nor the Palestinian Authority in general because they were not voters.

There is still no prisoner deal on Shalit after nearly three years. I know of no other. The nearest thing to a cease fire was broken by Israel. Israel hardly needs a particular excuse to kill non-Jews or to cry while doing it. http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/GAZA-pics/1-2b.jpg The mission of Hamas is to gain respectability as the Jewish Palestinian terrorists did in the 1920s and 1930s.

The problem as is well known in Israel and often discussed in their newspapers is that if the Palestinians or Syrians are quiet Israel ignores them and does nothing to reach a peace agreement. It is only when there is violence is Israel compelled to even go through the motions of seeking peace. The trick is to do enough violence that they have no choice but to make peace.

I don't know why you are so addled. This time you're confusing Israeli state terrorism with Jewish people in general. Doh!

spin

Yes, everything Americans do is just simply a mistake, never calculated attempt at anything, just blundering around trying to be heroes and stuff. They send 6 billion dollars per year to Israeli government, that is just something that happens, noone knows how, just a mistake. They went to Iraq, with all these high ideals, just happened to torture thousands of people, kill over a million and displace 3+ million, how did it happen - I dunno! We were there with great hopes, just was never meant to be. Would have SO liked it to be a democracy, just happened to disband the whole Iraqi army after they sent general Garner home - another honest mistake by the way, they just thought Bremer would do a better job. But Obama will correct this, he is pulling out in 3011.

With respect, we REALLY need America and Americans to blamed by our friends and allies for our tremendous cockups. You know, stupidity is supposed to be painful; a maxim that every effort has been made to do away with in this country. I cannot think of a single act of the US lately that could be at all construed as a serious effort on behalf of the later-aggrieved parties. A lot of propaganda has been (and continues to be, btw) pumped out to try to obfuscate issues, but those who pay close attention can always see right through these attempts.

There are a LOT of stupid, and/or willfully ill-informed people with tremendous amounts of money in the US. Seeing tragedies unfold, and being unable to alleviate them, is hard to take over time.

Do you realise what skill and effort it takes to completely isolate American population from the rest of the world by the means of propaganda, organise a logistic operation of supporting an army 180k strong on the other side of the world year after year, get both houses of parliament to approve any proposal you want passed, delude US judicial system enough to enforce torture as a matter of fact, get the whole US system to outsource 70% of intelligence to private companies, outsource 40% of the military effort to mercenaries without having anyone even raise the question?

Those people might be rich, but if you think they are stupid, you are stupid.

I had a feeling you were, but I know that some Americans have made an actual effort to stabalize the region, so those are who I was referring to, in an effort to not insult the entire American population. I should have had the words "some Americans" put in that post as opposed to just "Americans", but I apparently didn't proofread it.

This policy of destabalization which has seemingly been inacted since the second world war is coming periliously close to snapping back in the US's face. If American's thought 9/11 was bad, wait until South American nations kick Al Qaeda out of the way to bloody your noses themselves. And that doesn't even consider the super power that has already manifested in China, or the resurgence of the super power of Russia, either of which are more than capable of obliterating the US in a matter of hours, though this would be mutual.

So yes, these policies are indeed the work of egotistical and brainless fucktards on a path to self destruction. They are not the work of intelligent people. Regardless of what they have or have not accomplished.

Never assume conspiracy when simple stupidity will suffice.

I sort of collect conspiracy theories mainly to separate the real ones from the imaginary ones. For example there is the centuries old Illuminati/Jewish/Opus Dei conspiracy to take over the world. If after all these centuries it has not succeeded it is not one we need be concerned about even if it is real. One world ruled by Christ has been an open objective for two millenia and that is borrowed from an older one ruled by Yahweh.

So much for conspiracies. On the other hand we have Alexander of Macedon who was involved in an open conspiracy with stated objectives.

You espouse the existence of a hidden purpose for US support of Israel which you divine (imagine?) has something to do with a master plan for the Middle East. Yet when confronted with the simple requirement to present the strategic objective of this secret plan I see nothing but a reiteration of its existence.

Every self-inflicted punishment on Israel is another clue. Every screw up by the US is part of the master plan. Unlike National Treasure where one clue leads to another you have a Da Vinci code where loosely connected clues individually point towards the secret. (I will not fit Next and Knowing into this description as that would point to a certain actor being at the heart of the Israel conspiracy.)

Never assume conspiracy when simple stupidity will suffice.

As to Israel, yes it is stupidity. From the pre-Balfour Joint Congressional Resolution in favor of Palestine as a homeland for Jews through the post-WWI congressional endorsement of Balfour to the 1948 US recognition by President Truman bluntly stated as done because there were millions of Jewish voters and no Palestinian voters it has been one more case foreign policy actions based upon local politics. It continues from Truman down to this day.

It is US support for what the jewish Americans want for Israel much to the discomfort of Jewish Israelis. When they say America does not understand Israel they mean Jewish Americans.

The point of misunderstanding is quite simple. Jewish Americans do not support Israel per se. They support a political party in Israel, namely the Likud now and in its prior incarnations. This is the normal mistake made by the US. All through the Cold War it supported the political parties in country which were anti-communist even when that was not the best thing for the country or even a bad thing for the country as in Vietnam.

jewish Americans support the jingoistic Likud and similar parties. Support as in getting US government support for their political platform even if rejected by Israelis. Support as in money, political contributions and open bribery even under Israeli law.

No, it won't. In any situation you end up in, there are bound to be opportunities. If you assume noone is going to try to use them, you have to assume that there are no pragmatic, intelligent people that fight to get influence and seize the opportunities at any point in time. If you assume this, it is pretty obvious you are not dealing with reality.

As 'conspiracy theory' goes, it is a bullshit loaded phrase. Sort of like 'extraordinary randition' and 'national security'.

Again, this 'conspiracy' language is bullshit. No plan is flawless, people mostly shoot for the stars and hit the moon. If you discard people's efforts on the grounds that their insanely ambitious plans only accomplished 1/6 of the goal, then I know how to make you oblivious of everything I do - just make plans that are 6 times as ambitious as what I really want to achieve.

No, there is no hidden purpose, it is very public. Never meassure whether some plan is being implemented by the success rate, but by actions of the parties involved. I will present a simple strategic objective right here and now and I have done so before: NOT destibilizing the area would mean that someone geographically closer or with more influence might gain the resources of the region and an upper hand in geo-political matters. It's not a question of what they have to gain, they really can't afford not to engage.

Again, you assume I buy into some 'conspiracy theory'. I don't.

I believe smart people will try what they can in a situation they are in. If they are without influence, they will try to get it. Once they get it, they will try to use it. Some times they will make a plan of action, just like an enterpreneur would. From the plan of action they can calculate a budget and from that the need for investment.

If you think this is not going on on all levels of human exiastence and at all possible times, you need to rethink reality.

Voters are only a consideration to local legislation. In matters of forreign policy, things are often too important to be just a publicistic pun and publicist oppinion is often generated to support a policy, not the other way around. The amount of bad-will generated by US support of Israeli govt. is enormous and there are plenty Jewish people who condemn US for supporting Israeli govt. in what they do.

Motives for this support must be searched in other places than just publicistic manouvering. I already mentioned that US policy makers really can't see any benefit in not supporting Israel. It's a milirtary base with medium range nuclear warheads, it can be used for many fun things.

Apparently, US policy makers made that same 'mistake' of supporting violent autoritharian regimes in Argentina, Guatemala, Chile, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libanon, Vietnam, Cambodia, Corea, ... You know, when police try to solve a crime, they try to identify motive and see if there was opportunity. They don't say: ah well, he did it because he was stupid, anyone that says differently is just paranoid delusional conspiracy theorist.

This has been going on for decades, maybe it's time you started thinking like a cop for a while.

Israel is not in charge, any more than the hit-man is in charge of the family. The hit-man takes all the risk and gets little pay for his work. That his mindset is close to the Don's is no surprise, but does not mean the Don takes orders from the hit-man.

If you don't mind, I will not take his word on anything.

You propose that a single nationality runs US government. I propose a far better commonality for the people running the US government. Let me make my case.

While some of the people with influence might be Jewish and are even relating in terms of nationality and religion in the context of their work, there are millions more of the same nationality that have nothing to do with the power system in the US gvernment. Indeed, some of them oppose directly both Israeli and US policies on the grounds of human rights, international law, religious doctrin etc. Furtner more not all people with influence in the US government are Jewish. There are many different nationalities and religions. Indeed, if you compare the size of the Jewish lobby to the Lockheed Martin lobby, it is about the size of a toilet on the spaceship Enterprize.

If you look at this group of people you are trying to describe, there is a much beter way to categorise them. They are all rich, power-hungry, unscrupulous and well connected actors who operate on the global scale. This is a certain type of people, rather than a nationality. ALL the people who exercise influence on US government through these mobster-like channels are are this type at some point or another or all the time, and ALL people of this type try to gain influence on political power structure everywhere. That I think is a much safer bet than just saying "Jewish".

Now, you could discuss the basis for someone becoming such a person and whether being of some nationality connects the dots more readily to create just such a personality, but I don't see any support for that theory. Certainly not when I see the number of Jewish people risking their reputation, livelihood and even bodily harm and death trying to tell the truth and fight their own government.

If you are of the deconstructionist view that disgust with and dislike of murderers translates into fear then there is nothing I can do to make you rational.

If you are saying I am repelled by the ignorant, pro-israel rednecks in the South, New York City and Miami you are correct.

If you believe I am intolerant of a criminal nation run by militaristic racists you are correct.

If you believe I am disgusted by the subservience of US politicians to the murderous whims of Israeli politicians you also correct.

If you are saying THIS http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/ makes me antisemitic then I ask you why the whole world is not antisemitic?